Biking vs. running, working out lower body

rEdShawks · 06-23-2008, 01:09 AM

So even though many of you have come to be pissed off about me due to me constant support of "perfect" products, i hope we can discuss this topic normally, and i promise i will stay away from "as seen on tv products"

anyhow, i was wondering, what is a better workout for the lower body in general , biking, running or swimming? i am pretty sure swimming is the best so i will ask between biking and running. which will work out my lower body better, assuming i exert the around the same force on both exercises?

thankyou

omgitsrick · 06-23-2008, 01:13 AM

Eh, for strength or for cardio? Depends really, running will get you better at running, and biking the same. For straight up leg muscle probably biking though.

rEdShawks · 06-23-2008, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by omgitsrick

Eh, for strength or for cardio? Depends really, running will get you better at running, and biking the same. For straight up leg muscle probably biking though.

well both of them are real good for cardio i would think running is better, but im wondering about leg muscle

DEVILsSON · 06-23-2008, 01:48 AM

dude you have to break free of this 'what's better' mentality. It depends. It always fucking depends.

swimming is the lowest impact form of cardio just about so it's easier on the joints. You also burn more calories.

biking is probably second easiest on the joints and may potentially be more enjoyable for you because you can get to go mountain biking.

running is fairly hard on the joints but your body still needs some stress on the joints for adaptation....also you'll probably be able to produce better strength gains from hill sprints than from swimming...

then again all of this stuff is not really for 'strength' it's essentially conditioning based training.

Bottom line: DO IT ALL...variety is the key...

magicman531 · 06-23-2008, 01:53 AM

you should probably stick to discussing the wonder products as seen on tv.

none of those really work your legs that much. endurance wise they will, but muscularly for strength they won't do much.

Chaseg1520 · 06-23-2008, 02:30 AM

The devil has spoken...

On a side note. I don't understand what the craze is with setting limitations on EVERYTHING in our society. Especially with working out... it is like everyone wants to ask "What is the perfect exercise so I can do it only?" It just makes no sense and I don't know where it came from...

*steps down from soapbox*

Ian Coe · 06-23-2008, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magicman531

you should probably stick to discussing the wonder products as seen on tv.

none of those really work your legs that much. endurance wise they will, but muscularly for strength they won't do much.

Sprint 200m up a 45 incline hill a few times and come back to me

Ian Coe · 06-23-2008, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chaseg1520

The devil has spoken...

On a side note. I don't understand what the craze is with setting limitations on EVERYTHING in our society. Especially with working out... it is like everyone wants to ask "What is the perfect exercise so I can do it only?" It just makes no sense and I don't know where it came from...

*steps down from soapbox*

**Urban** · 06-23-2008, 07:57 AM

yes.